I wrote a beautiful post with a snarky moral and a description of desire. Then the Internet, engorged with wrath, ate the thing like so much pimento spread on cheap sandwiches.
But I wanted you to love the girl I saw, and love her as much as I did. She wasn't perfect, (no one ever is), but she was flawed in such an interesting way, and she was sexual enough to be irresistible and chaste enough to be respectable And she was all the right things to me. She was mine, but I was willing to share her with you, just in trade for a minute of your time, and then the Internet consumed her with righteous judgement. Now she's dead--I would never dare attempt to resurrect her for fear I would botch her in the attempt. So I will just want her in my mind and in so doing keep her alive.
I do know how the story would have ended:
"I can't tell you the name, because it will give away too much, (I want you to have too much): Regret, the Monster That Keeps my Dreams."
And now that my half-told attemtped moral is doubletrue, I leave you with this to ponder: if by beholding we become changed, how long must I stare at something beautiful before I want to make love to it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have never written a more beautiful load of hogwash.
ReplyDeleteIs that love at first sight? want at first sight? or something else entirely?
ReplyDeleteFor me, I know that it's personality and intelligence that draws me toward a person. They become good-looking to me; who cares what the world thinks? (But maybe this is part of my problem.)
Eeh, I just know that mutability (We are as midnight clouds that veil the darkling moon; how restlessly they speed and gleam and quiver--streaking the darkness radiantly. Yet soon, night is come, and they are lost forever) has never had more resonance in one of my posts.
ReplyDeleteI wrote a post about finding someone fascinating, losing them, and then losing my closest recollection of them. Weird.
Oh, mutability. That works too. I don't think the Internet can pass righteous judgment, though. But I understand that it can be vindictive, for some reason. :D
ReplyDeleteI am angry right now, and I'm just generally being idiotic. But, well, I always try to give my honest opinion of things, and.
ReplyDeleteNo. No, actually, I won't.
You wrote a thing, and I read it. Good enough.
Maybe I should. Because I am about 99.9% sure you will misread that comment and think that I think things that I don't.
ReplyDeleteI hate this because "I was willing to share her with you, just in trade for a minute of your time."
I hate this because I hate snarky morals.
I hate this because "If by beholding we become changed, how long must I stare at something beautiful before I want to make love to it?"
In other news, you don't need a comma with your parenthetical, and you misspelled "attempted."
Why did you call it hogwash?
Upon reflection, this redeems it: "But I wanted you to love the girl I saw, and love her as much as I did. "
ReplyDeleteIt was 1am. I lost the post I liked. I don't like this one.
ReplyDeleteHm. I do love me some extra commas, but on my phone . . . . I can't tell.
Yes, of course.
ReplyDeleteThat answer seems to be a non-reply to my non-answer.
ReplyDeleteWell, yes. I wrote a strangely superficial thing. Sorry. I don't want to admit it.
Don't worry about it. Sometimes superficial is easier than anything else.
ReplyDelete